by jboullion | Aug 6, 2008 | Uncategorized
From a story posted on the Web site of The Business Journal of Milwaukee:
The three owners of the Elm Road Generating Station in Oak Creek will pay $105 million over a 25-year period for Lake Michigan protection projects to end a three- year legal battle over the water intake structure at the power plant, Clean Wisconsin and the Sierra Club said Wednesday.
Clean Wisconsin and the Sierra Club filed suit after the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources issued a permit allowing the use of a once-through cooling system at the coal-fired power plant. The organizations claimed that once-through cooling did not represent the best available technology for cooling the plant and thus should not be permitted.
Under the settlement, the three utilities that own the generating station — We Energies of Milwaukee, Madison Gas & Electric of Madison and Wisconsin Public Power Inc. of Sun Prairie — agreed to the following:
– Funding $4 million per year from 2010 through 2035 for projects to address water quality issues in Lake Michigan such as invasive species, polluted runoff, toxic loadings, and habitat destruction;
– Purchase or construct 15 megawatts of solar generation by Jan. 1, 2015; and
– Support legislative efforts to establish a renewable energy portfolio standard of 10 percent by 2013 and 25 percent by 2025.
We Energies will also retire two coal-fired units in Presque Isle, Michigan and ask the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin for approval to construct 50 megawatts of 100 percent biomass-fueled power in Wisconsin.
In a media release, Mark Redsten, Exeuctive Director, of Clean Wisconsin said:
“We’re happy to have reached an agreement that has significant benefits for both the lake and the fight against global warming. These environmental protections help ensure Lake Michigan is a healthy natural resource for generations to come.”
From a separate release issed by the Sierra Club:
“In the long run, this agreement will result in dramatic improvements to the overall health of Lake Michigan and will contribute to the development of renewable energy sources such as solar and biomass,” said Jennifer Feyerherm, Wisconsin Clean Energy Campaign Director.
“It will help us address two of the most critical issues of our time—climate change and protection of one of the world’s greatest freshwater natural resources.”
by jboullion | Jul 17, 2008 | Uncategorized
From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Alliant Energy Corp. has proposed to build an inefficient, more polluting kind of coal-fired power plant at a time when concerns are rising about emissions from such plants, a key opponent of the project said Wednesday.
Alliant has proposed a $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion coal plant in Cassville in southwestern Wisconsin to help it meet rising demand for power. The utility is seeking state approval for the project, which is the third new, coal-fired power plant proposed in the state this decade.
But Clean Wisconsin staff scientist Peter Taglia called on Alliant to follow the lead of other utilities, such as Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy Corp., that have committed not to build new coal plants because of their emissions of greenhouse gases and rising construction costs.
“Anyone right now would think GM (General Motors) would be crazy to build a new Suburban plant,” he said.
“Five years ago, GM was saying fuel prices are going to remain low and everything’s going to be fine. The difference here is that this is a 50-year plant,” he said. “We are entering an era of high fuel prices and climate issues that are unprecedented, and this is the exact worst time to be building something that’s fraught with so many environmental and economic uncertainties.”
Alliant has said it delayed proposing a coal plant in recent years as it worked aggressively to expand in areas such as energy efficiency, renewable power and natural gas-fired power plants.
The utility announced last month that it would step up its investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency, increasing the funding for its efficiency program by 50%.
Alliant says it chose a less-efficient type of technology because that system is more conducive to burning switchgrass, corn stalks and other biomass. The plant will burn 20% biomass and 80% coal.
The utility also said last month that the cost of the project had risen to $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion from earlier projections of $850 million to $950 million.
“When you look at our resource plan as a whole, it’s a plan built around balance,” said Alliant spokesman Rob Crain. “And this plant certainly fits into that balanced plan.”
by jboullion | Jun 23, 2008 | Uncategorized
From an editorial in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Wisconsin Power & Light Co. took a significant step recently when it promised to offset the greenhouse gas emissions from a new coal plant it is proposing to build in southwestern Wisconsin. Company officials understand the importance of balancing energy sources to provide customers with reliable and affordable energy while reducing emissions that contribute to climate change.
The problem is that while Wisconsin needs power, it also needs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, not just offset increases in emissions. So while WP&L officials deserve credit for proposing their mitigation plan, they still need to make a more compelling case than they have so far for building a coal plant in Cassville.
State regulators need to carefully examine that case before they make their decision by the end of the year. And unless WP&L officials make a convincing case for the kind of coal plant they have proposed, the state shouldn’t give its OK.
In a recent meeting with the Journal Sentinel Editorial Board, company officials said demand was growing at a rate of 2% to 3% per year. To meet that demand, the utility says it needs to build a 300-megawatt $1.1 billion base load plant that would generate enough power to supply 150,000 homes.
Based on those numbers, WP&L, a subsidiary of Alliant Energy Corp., makes a reasonable case. Neither conservation nor renewable sources now available are likely to fill that demand.
But an analysis by state environmental and energy regulators predicts demand to grow by 1.65%. That analysis also concluded that although Alliant “needs to procure more energy resources to keep rates affordable,” this particular coal plant proposal was “not the least-cost option.” The environmental group Clean Wisconsin and the ratepayer group Citizens’ Utility Board oppose the plant and have urged the utility to spend more on energy efficiency and renewables. . . .
